He is the front runner for the Republican Party despite what the media says.  His numbers continue to grow and this debate proves that his numbers are only increasing.  

You called him a disaster in regards to the debate...which is what this entire thread is about.  Or have I missed something?  
Please do not be be condescending towards the people who intend to vote for Donald Trump.  You may disagree with Trump's values or where he stands on certain issues, but don't call me or others irrational because it doesn't fall in line with your line of thinking.  That's like saying your opinion matters while those who vote for him do not.
Be more respectful.

Well, the thead is about the election in general, not just the debate, the debate is just the current topic.  I was also giving my thoughts on the debate and since I personally don't think much of trump, I called him a disaster.

you are right though, I should be more respectful so I apologize.  I am just not a fan of trump.  I don't think he would make a good president at all.  He has flip flopped on almost every major issue, been associated with both parties over the years and doesn't seem to have much of any core principals.  He speaks in generalities or floats ideas that would never happen like having Mexico pay to put a fence on our border.  He has had multiple bankruptcies and... I could go on but that is probably enough.  There are many reasons that I personally don't like trump.

however, if you like him then who am I to judge, more power to you!

What I saw was the Trump show with special political guests.

I can't get behind anyone that gets lost in Trump's shadow....and I'm not alone.

I respect your opinion and we all know how political discussions can get out of hand.  Honestly, I am voting for ABH (Anybody But Hillary).  I felt that 7 of the 17 candidates stood out from the rest and I would happily vote for any of them just so HIllary doesn't become president.  My list of seven include as follows and in no particular order:

Mike Huckabee, Carly Fiorina, Ben Carson, John Kasich, Marco Rubio, Donald Trump, and Jeb Bush.

The first debate was much more substantive than the second, I think. The large crowd at the second debate seemed to make it difficult to get the candidates off of their talking points. I swear, at times it felt like I was watching a wrestling match, based on the audience participation.
Fiorina came off the best of all the candidates, Perry and Graham the worst, in my opinion. So while the second debate was more entertaining, I think the first was much more telling. Nobody did particularly well or poorly in the second, from my perspective.

yeah that's the result of the whole thing being made for TV ratings.  really unfortunate.  there shouldn't be audiences at these debates, and certainly not ones as large as that.  you can definitely see from watching the low-tier debate, as well as just taking looks at the general election debates (in which the audiences are made to swear they'll be quiet) that the presence of the audience (as well as Trump) made the tone of the whole evening much more "loose" and wild.

Locking by request.